Menu

Making Up for Missing Out

Back in February I had an interesting exchange with commenter TuffLove. The conversation focused on his recent singleness due to his wife of 20-some years feeling the call of the Alpha and decided cheat on him, later divorce him and then take up with an even more Beta fellow not long after her ‘fling’ (his story). You can read the whole exchange here if you like, but what TuffLove describes is a textbook example of the Alpha re-interest impulse that defines the Development and Redevelopment/Reinsurance phases I outlined in the Preventative Medicine Series.

Not to rub salt in the wound, but you and your ex’s story is a cliché now. It’s the “making up for missing out” story. Woman marries early, cashes her chips in before she knows better, lives vicariously through her single girlfriends until such time that the “Alpha” she knew at 20 is the hapless Beta she’s saddled with at 39.

Divorce porn media convinces her to bail out and get with the Alpha she’s always missed for all that time. She did everything in reverse – Beta comfort and dependability through her party years, to be traded for Alpha excitement before it’s too late.

I was inspired to sift back through my comments for this conversation, because I was also made aware of a new example of both this phase’s dynamic and the divorce-porn industry that will inevitably find some very fertile soil to plant itself in.

This example comes to us courtesy of Robin Rinaldi, author of The Wild Oats Project. This book and the “experiment in cuckoldry” such as it was, centers on, you guessed it, a 40-something woman who abandons her marriage for one year to bang the random men she was prevented from fucking by being married to her dependable, unexciting Beta husband. Granted, the husband didn’t want children and this contention resulted in him getting a vasectomy – his only act of Alpha with her as far as I know. Her childlessness is of course her go-to victimization card she hopes will endear feminine sympathy for her taking matters into her own hands for a year.

The de rigueur rationalizations and appeals to womanly “self-discovery” are handed out like the M&Ms any Red Pill man will come to expect, but I’m drawing attention to this book because it has the potential to be the next step in the 50 Shades of Grey evolution of Open Hypergamy:

Get ready for “The Wild Oats Project.” And not just the book. Get ready for “The Wild Oats Project” phenomenon — the debates, the think pieces, the imitators and probably the movie. Get ready for orgasmic meditation and the Three Rules. Get ready for “My Clitoris Deals Solely in Truth” T-shirts.

On a social scale it seem like the next deductive next step – blend a justifiable Eat Pray Love narrative with the more visceral (yet unignorable) sexuality of 50 Shades and women will readily consume it. I expect there will be the same hamster spinnings of NAWALT and most women respect their marriage vows, but it still wont wash with the overwhelming ‘guilty pleasure’ popularity that 50 Shades exposed on a large scale.

Writers like Rinaldi and E.L. James have tapped into the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks anxiety rooted in women’s primal insecurity inherent in doubting their optimization of Hypergamy. If appealing to visceral sex sells products to men, appealing to the inherent ‘you-only-live-once’ insecurity of feminine Hypergamy sells to women – and women being the primary consumers in western society, sell it does.

Ballista asks, on his site, “why is divornography (divorce pornography) marketed exclusively to women? Why are there articles in women’s magazines and romance novels for women like Eat Pray Love that glamorize divorce, but nothing of the sort exists or is marketed to men? Why is there no male divorce porn, no stories of men divorcing their obese, aging harpy wives, liberating themselves from their marriage vows, and ending up living happily ever after banging large-breasted 21 year-old lingerie models?”

Can you imagine the uproar? Can you feel the Love yet?

Since the start of the sexual revolution there’s been a social undercurrent of excusable, justifiable comeuppance for any gender related imbalance women have been taught to believe that men are enjoying or benefitting from. Whatever male-specific indignation that would reflect negatively on men becomes a form of empowerment for women – particularly if that indignation facilitates men’s sexual strategy at the expense of women’s. Thus a woman taking a yearlong break from her marriage to bed as many men as she cares to indulge (fully expecting to come back to her dutiful Beta husband afterwards) is cast as an iconoclastic hero for casting off “patriarchal sexual repression.”

Furthermore, it’s only a small step to wipe the accountability of her actions off on the horrible man who wont cooperate by doing his duty to fulfill her sexual strategy. There is no more permanent a devotion to the male sexual strategy than to get a vasectomy and thus deny a woman the ultimate culmination of her own. If you ever want to experience just how close to livestock the Feminine Imperative considers men to be, just try getting a vasectomy before you’re married or without a wife’s explicit and written consent. Legally it’s easier to geld horses or neuter dogs.

It’s important to consider how the doubt over past hypergamous choices effects a mature woman. When a woman has passed through her Epiphany Phase and become a never-married woman into her late 30s the mindset becomes one of self-justification. This is similar to the Kate Bolick effect whereby a woman has very little choice but to live with her past intimate decisions and convert necessities into virtues. She embraces a ready-made empowerment narrative wherein she convinces herself that her choices were the bold, unconventional ones she needed in order to grow.

Next and most commonly is the woman who consolidated on a man’s commitment once she’d become less sexually competitive just prior to 30. I can’t be sure, but it’s likely that Rinaldi falls into this demo, the schedule more or less plays the same.

From Preventative Medicine IV:

Redevelopment / Reinsurance

The Redevelopment phase can either be a time of relational turmoil or one of a woman reconciling her hypergamous balance with the man she’s paired with.

The security side of this hypergamous balance has been established for her long term satisfaction and the Alpha reinterest begins to chafe at the ubiquitous certainty of that security. Bear in mind that the source of this certainty need not come from a provider male. There are a lot of eventualities to account for. It may come from a ‘never married’ woman’s capacity to provide it for herself, the financial support levied from a past husband(s) or father(s) of her children, government subsidies, family money, or any combination thereof.

In any event, while security may still be an important concern, the same security becomes stifling for her as she retrospectively contemplates the ‘excitement’ she used to enjoy with former, now contextually Alpha, lovers, or perhaps the “man her husband used to be”

“Steve has been with me for the past 50 years and Ron for 47. Neither is the man I am married to, nor have I seen or spoken to either since our love affairs ended in my 20s. All the same, there is no denying they have both messed with my marriage to Olly, the man who has been by my side for the past 40 years.

I found myself thinking about them both as I read recent research that suggested women who played the field before marriage are unhappier with their lot than those who entered matrimony virginal.
Angela Neustatter has often questioned what life would have been like had she married another man

Angela Neustatter has often questioned what life would have been like had she married another man.”

I think it’s important to remember that an Alpha Widow doesn’t even necessarily need to have slept with a man she considered ‘Alpha’ from her past to feel the Alpha Widow effect:

Five minutes of alpha — even worse, five minutes of alpha rejection — can fuck with the heads of even the most desirable women. And continue fucking with them years later. In comparison — if the reports are to be believed — women who divorce beta schlubs after years of marriage pretty much forget them before the ink is dry on the papers.

Sometimes being an Alpha Widow means hypergamic ‘rumination’ over a better Alpha option a woman missed or was rejected by in her past in comparison to the guy she “settled on” for marriage. This is particularly significant if that guy was a woman’s Plan B husband. It’s not just the actual Alphas she banged back in the day, you’re competing with an imagined ideal and the more women are empowered and encouraged to feel secure in exploring their hypergamous options (i.e. correct their ‘soul mate’ mistake) the more you’ll read stories like this.

However, for all intents and purposes my instincts tell me Rinaldi falls into the “making up for missing out” demographic. On whole this demo of women can eventually become the worst self-inflicted Alpha Widows in their latter years. I let Rinaldi explain…

“I refuse to go to my grave with no children and only four lovers,” she declares. “If I can’t have one, I must have the other.”

If you’re wondering why that is the relevant trade-off, stop overthinking this. “The Wild Oats Project” is the year-long tale of how a self-described “good girl” in her early 40s moves out, posts a personal ad “seeking single men age 35-50 to help me explore my sexuality,” sleeps with roughly a dozen friends and strangers, and joins a sex commune, all from Monday to Friday, only to rejoin Scott on weekends so they can, you know, work on their marriage.

[…] One of her oldest friends calls her out. “How is sleeping with a lot of guys going to make you feel better about not having kids?” she asks. Rinaldi’s answer: “Sleeping with a lot of guys is going to make me feel better on my deathbed. I’m going to feel like I lived, like I didn’t spend my life in a box. If I had kids and grandkids around my deathbed, I wouldn’t need that. Kids are proof that you’ve lived.” It’s a bleak and disheartening rationale, as though women’s lives can achieve meaning only through motherhood or sex.

As I illustrated in Preventive Medicine, there’s a root insecurity inherent in women’s Hypergamy. From an immediate perspective this can manifest itself as a battery of women’s psychological and sociological filtering mechanisms for Hypergamous optimization with a man she’d just met, to the husband she’s been married to for 20 years. However, it’s vitally important for men, particularly married and LTR men, to understand that the confines of a committed relationship is never any insurance against Hypergamy in the long-term, and the rationalizations of that Hypergamy evolve as women mature.

Of course the first, best advice is the simplest “just never get married”, but even if you are a single man entering your 50s you will encounter women who’ve experienced (or never experienced) a crisis of Hypergamy and the incessant drive for Alpha optimization of it. If you are a younger man dealing with an older woman (why, I don’t know) you will likely encounter women like Rinaldi and women with similar mindsets as Robin Korth. It’s important to know what you are, or will be, dealing with.

Post navigation

234 comments

I don’t understand why the husband would go along with this plan. This is a great opportunity to cut loose a growing liability with no hassles. Sure he’s still gonna lose half his crap, but that’s a given. He can make more money, while her looks are only going down and in 5 years at most she’ll be blowing German Sheppards because that’s the only male attention she’ll still be able to pull.

The real mind fuck for me here is that women will get behind the narrative that a married woman “missed out”, but poo-poo the narrative of missing out that an incel might talk about. I guess it comes back to the “You can Have It All” ™ narrative only applying to women. Clearly being born with a penis is means you don’t deserve it.

Jack Labear – “Eggs are scarce and precious and sperm are cheap, plentiful and disposable. Both men and women have that fact hardwired in their evolved firmware (instincts).”

I think this is more a cultural artifact that places greater emphasis on survival of humanity generally than on survival of a particular civilization.

During the siege of Aleisia the Gauls were starving. The story goes that the at one point to preserve the tribe and it’s ability to continue to fight it was proposed to eat the women and children so that the men might live. It was the men that would continue the civilization, women would simply bare children of the conquerors. The other more likely story is at one point the women were cast out toward the Roman lines to create a diversion allowing the Gauls to break the siege. It failed of course. Evidence of this is matter of considerable controversy.

When the Romans went on a genocidal rampage they crucified the men and enslaved the women and children. This ensured the culture died with the men. Numerous other examples of similar behaviors are strewn throughout history.

I suspect the change in attitude to save the women and children is a form of sentiment more than a biological instinct. Nature controls animal populations in strange ways. Perhaps there’s a meta shift in such attitudes to either preserve genes or preserve cultural ideas assuming the culture is suitably resilient.

Anyway with 7 billion people on this planet it’s obvious eggs aren’t exactly rare or special.

The obvious and simple counter move to these overcomplex, hypergamy-driven schemes is mentioned: Just don’t get married.

Well done.

But it will not be enough – already around the world, states are starting to implement mechanisms to force men to provide for women they id not marry, like “common law” marriage in some parts of the Anglosphere.

More research (on the individual AND blog-level) is needed – the best solution would be a world map that details where and how you can avoid any judicial liabilities for fucking a women longer than ONS.

Mature women, married or not, actually believe deep in their bones that not only is open hypergamy their right of ‘redevelopment phase’ passage, but as an added bonus, they are publicly applauded and can receive cash and prizes due to the sheep mentality the female hindbrain, thus turning this next “evolution” in open hypergamy into a new money making industry right off the back of the 50 shades phenomenon.

Eggs are relativly expensive on a local and tribal scale – as soon as we leave a stone-age tribal setting AND the idea that this exact small-scale unit is the (solisistic?) focus of theory(!!)…not so much.

And there is a congruent value gap that is rarely talked about:

1) *Biologically*, eggs are precious on a local, small scale.
2) *Socially*, eggs (=females) are nearly worthless because they cannot conquer/destroy or build/innovate.
3)*Biologically*, sperms are worthless on a local, small scale.
4) *Socially*, sperms (=men) are highly valuable, because they can conquer/destroy or build/innovate.

The (long-term, histroic) deal-breaker is this:
Socially strong collectives can simply take eggs from weaker collectives, cf. war brides or all the myriad tales of “kill the men and boys, take their women for pleasure”.

It looks like a hidden war between sexies that is disguised in so called: “love”. it is struggle in order to survive in this world. Bear in mind that you are always the most important, because if there sth wrong with you – this infuences your family or close relatives around you negatively. If you are fine, your family is fine. Invest in yourself, get education, build career, takce care of your body and mind, lift weights and do aerobics. enter into marriage only if you are the owner of main valuable personal and real property. I am not sorry for guys who get marriaged and own nothing. My advice is go into marriage only if you have career and house, apartment etc. If you are owner of those things woman will reconsider thoroughly if she wants to check out of marriage or if she disobeys you.

It’s another example of how women “having it all” or appearing to have it all in our society (and society playing along like everything is just fine). Men, on the other hand, are going through a mid life crisis if they decided to divorce and take up the younger 20 something year old. Men are seen as scum (when they do it) but the Eat, Pray, Love philosophy gives women a “pass” on it..so it’s fine. The media works its magic on women as well giving them the green light – from commercials to movies on how it’s fine for Stella to “get her groove back”…queue the applause.

I see society becoming unbalanced if the government continues to force men to pay for subsidies for women (and children) that don’t belong to them. The “bachelor tax” is something that many men may (or can) get behind as a movement to push back.

There’s already something like a “bachelor tax”. In some countries a single unmarried individual pay more taxes than married ones. For example here in Germany. Depending on what you earn, the difference is remarkable.
I bet there’s also something like that in the US.

Subsidies for women and children must come from somewhere.
End Game has begun, gentlemen.

Doesn’t surprise me at all anymore that a guy would go along with something like this. Take my in-laws, for instance. My father-in-law tends to be red pill, though he has no idea there’s such a term or what it means. Can build or fix anything, hunts, doesn’t usually take shit from anyone. He recently built some shelves for my mother-in-law.

Building shelves sound pretty alpha, right? Not so fast, my friends. He built those shelves because he didn’t have the balls to tell my bitch MIL to get rid of all the dust collecting shit she keeps buying, and to quit buying it in the first place. A guy does have to pick is battles but trust me, her buying crap and making their house a mess is a big issue.

So, if a guy with a long track record of tending to be alpha can’t draw the line in a case like this, don’t expect much from your average beta either.

“On a social scale it seem like the next deductive next step – blend a justifiable Eat Pray Love narrative with the more visceral (yet unignorable) sexuality of 50 Shades and women will readily consume it.”

Wow. Such a movie with quality production could easily make over a billion dollars. It would be a phenomenon that exceeds “Titanic” (women got insane tingles about that movie). Titanic merely featured a women ditching her jerk fiancée for Leonardo DiCaprio; but this would be on a whole different level.

They might as well call this movie “50 Cans of Gasoline” which would only help fuel the dumpster fire that the western “institution of marriage.”

To quote Neil McCauley from the movie Heat,

“Don’t let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner.”

Getting married is slaverly for man.Men are not designed to attach themselves to a single vagina. My opinion is females are a filter for best genetics from her perceivable males.Getting married is a huge commitment for men.

“I don’t understand why the husband would go along with this plan. This is a great opportunity to cut loose a growing liability with no hassles. Sure he’s still gonna lose half his crap, but that’s a given. He can make more money, while her looks are only going down and in 5 years at most she’ll be blowing German Sheppards because that’s the only male attention she’ll still be able to pull.”

Sounds great in theory and this is how I felt once I got over the initial sting. Things started to brighten up.. I started to realize my (sexual) life was far from over.. started thanking the stars that I wouldn’t be dealing with her bullshit through the menopausal years and her downward aesthetic spiral..

But, since she’s come back at me in the courts now, I’m feeling worse than ever. Initially, I had shaken her off with an amicable, agreed divorce, and we agreed to sort of ‘work together’ to complete our responsibilities to the kids. She’s now realized she can instead still control me, even moreso now than before, with the judge standing right behind her to enforce that I will never be free.

Not only will I have to pay her for the privilege of seeing my daughter, but this new paradigm of how to solve high conflict, post-marital relationships has, you guessed it, fallen right in line with the overall FI. A Parenting coordinator to tell me I have to be ‘fair’ and do some things ‘her way’. Forget about tough-love (my way), oh no that would put the coordinator against me and the judge on her side. I will now be forced to parent like a woman (i.e. correctly). Counseling for the children that will cause neuroses in them going forward. Online calendar and communication portal to force us to ‘plan’ together and stay in communication with each other.

See, just when I though.. cool, now I can be rid of this bitch, do everything my way without having to justify it endlessly, have it challenged, etc.. Nope, I’m more beholden to her now than ever before, with a nice helping of scrutiny by the courts and counselors to go along with it.

“the same security becomes stifling for her as she retrospectively contemplates the ‘excitement’ she used to enjoy with former, now contextually Alpha, lovers, or perhaps the “man her husband used to be”

Doesn’t get more exciting than banging a convicted rapist in a closet 13 times now does it.

Would love to see a picture of the sheriff’s deputy that she’s married to, just to complete the betabux vision i’ve got running through my mind right now.

“Missing out” raises the question: “Missing out” on what? What does she think she missed out on? It’s whatever she believes at that time, and her response to it, that’s important here. In Robin Rinaldi’s case, it’s children. I suspect that’s true of a lot of women who consolidate on “beta bucks” around age 30 and have the attendant fertility problems. For other women it’s sex with very attractive men — something they missed out on because they married in their late teens or early 20s, and spent their most attractive years as wife to one man and mother to a brood of kids. I would guess for others, it’s having a “fulfilling” career, which is compromised due to marital and motherly obligations.

Ultimately it’s about the fact that the woman had to compromise. She had to give up one thing to get something else. And if the “something else” she actually has is viewed as “deficient” or “less than” or insufficient or not enough (now), that’s when the “I’ve missed out” crops up.

In Rinaldi’s case it was about salving her pain of not having children. But, she and her husband were complicit in creating the problem. First because she wasn’t sure she wanted kids then decided after marriage she wanted kids. Her husband wasn’t sure he wanted kids; then decided after marriage he did NOT want kids. He then foreclosed the option with a vasectomy, thus thwarting her (newly devised) sexual strategy of wanting children.

Women don’t want to compromise on their sexual strategies. They want to have whatever they want, when they want it. And society has told them in no uncertain terms that they don’t ever have to compromise. They should have whatever they want, whenever they want it. It’s about alpha fucks in the 20s, beta bucks (and mommyhood) in the 30s and up to about age 45, then back to alpha fucks in late middle age.

Always, ALWAYS assume a woman with a functioning reproductive tract will eventually want children. Always, ALWAYS presume a woman who is “undecided” about children will eventually want children at some undetermined future point. Always, ALWAYS presume a woman who is marrying around age 28-32 hears her bio-clock roaring in her ears like a freight train, even as she claims to be “undecided” about children.

I’m convinced that for a lot of women now, especially hardcore career women like Rinaldi, is that having kids is not so much about being a mother and having a family. It’s rather about earning the “motherhood” merit badge. It’s being able to point to her child and say “I did that. I’m a mom.” It’s not about the joys of having a family; it’s about checking a box off the bucket list of Life Achievements.

“Would love to see a picture of the sheriff’s deputy that she’s married to, just to complete the betabux vision i’ve got running through my mind right now.”

What I find more amusing is the fact that in every one of these stories, there is some photo of the woman involved. The reason is twofold: So the men reading the story can say “total ugly dog” or “I’d bang her”. And so the women reading the story can (1) express outrage over why, why, a nice looking married woman like her would stoop so low; or (2) reassure themselves that they’re better (looking) than she is.

It’s amazing to me that the topic describes perfectly how I was pursued by my former girl friend when she was happily married for 20+ years.She(in her 40’s) tracked me down and when I finally got divorced she found me.I rejected her and she never seemed to get over it.She lied to her husband,lied to her Mom(who she used as a excuse to have a reunion)used her friend as a cover and spent a week with me.By description she had a “Beta” husband and a bland life with 2 kids.I arrived at a later date and called saying I was in the area and we could go to dinner.She freaked and reversed mental thought.How I reacted was a suggestion that we include her husband in our little affair.I haven’t heard from her since.Hope her life is good but no matter what,she ain’t ever coming back.

“Precisely.. i was about to say myself… would these women have my back if i detonated my current relationship with my girlfriend because i had 12 years of ‘dryspell’ to make up for?”

The real fucked up part is this: if you were still incel, they’d judge you even more harshly. If you’re an incel man, there’s a reason you deserve your fate. Meanwhile every married woman that “missed out“ is an innocent “victim”.

Alex.I went through the same thing with a few twist but you can refuse to be around her and when your kids are 18 she can be broomed from your life.It’s a shame we never understood what that little doughnut could do to our life.You’ve got a lot of good years left,enjoy your freedom.

I dated a lot of women who swore they didn’t want children. Of the ones I’ve bumped into subsequently, they all have children, except for the ones desparately trying to have one via IVF or donor procedures.

Just as with the “I’m still hot after 40” narrative at the heart of all this eat pray fuck around nonsense, women’s central assertions about sex are often dishonest. You can only lie about what nature wants to do for so long. It always gets its way eventually. The harder we resist it, the more disastrous our comeuppance.

The even more fucked up part of Rinaldi’s story is that she expected her husband to go along with this completely. She expected to call all the sexual shots. She expected to be completely absent from her husband during the week, having sex with other men, and then home on the weekends to “work on their marriage”.

And the worst part of it is that she fully expected, probably DEMANDED, that her husband get fully on board with it — that he agree that her decision to “explore her sexuality”. He is not only to acquiesce to it; but he’s to embrace it as being beneficial.

The subtext here really is “Husband, you did me wrong. You won’t compromise your imperatives. You won’t do your duty and be the agent of my imperatives. You won’t father my children. You crushed my dreams of motherhood by getting sterilized. I’m going to get mine. I will compensate for your actions, and soothe my pain, by fucking hotter men than you with your full knowledge. You bastard — YOU OWE ME THIS, and you WILL go along with it. And I WILL DO IT because I’m ENTITLED to it.

“Oh, and I get to have sex, but you don’t. You’re not allowed to have sex with hotter, more exciting, more sexually enthusiastic women than me. That’s not fair. You hurt me. You crushed my dreams. You don’t get to have anything out of this deal. I am the one who’s entitled to get my needs met. You are not.”

Hence, Rinaldi’s indignation and shock and outrage at her discovery that her husband was having sex with a much younger woman during her own trysts with other men. Rinaldi’s moralizing and butthurt is laughable. It was Rinaldi herself who abandoned her marriage to pursue sex with hotter men and as cruel payback for her (now likely ex-)husband’s vasectomy.

Over 35 year old female belonging to the North American species are the worse.
They are stretched out by thousands of cocks, infected with VD, tough and rough. I’m Indian, so I consider them from.another planet. May Krishna have mercy on you guys battling these deformation of femininity.

You want the real irony here? Roosh can spend 9 years traveling the world, banging women in different countries with relative degrees of success and write more than half a dozen books about his experiences.

The media here and abroad paint him as a misogynist monster, a sex tourist predator or a deeply bitter man who’s a potential or borderline rapist.

Rinaldi takes a year off from her marriage, bangs at least 12 consecutive guys inside that year, expects her Beta husband to lie down for it with rationalizations of “working on their marriage”, then writes one book that becomes an instant best-seller.

Her (albeit salacious) behavior is characterized as ’empowerment’ by fem-centric media, no writer dares call her so much as a slut, and her rationales of YOLO fairplay inspire women’s inherent need of self-righteous indignation.

Did she really expect her husband to go along with it, though? I’m not so sure.

How often do we see that women work passively, hoping for a certain outcome but not wanting to take responsibility for it. They hope to manipulate others (ie. men) into taking action, to give them the results they want without the responsibility.

If this woman wanted children so badly, why didn’t she just divorce her husband years ago and try with someone else? She would have likely been able to find someone to inseminate her. Perhaps she didn’t want to actively be responsible for a divorce. Perhaps she didn’t want to be the one to do it. Perhaps she wanted to create an environment so intolerable to her husband that HE would be the one who would have to take action and bear the responsibility.

Take note of something that she writes fleetingly – she eventually came to admire her husband for his unilateral vasectomy. She ADMIRED him for it, though she initially resented the hell out of it. She admires a man who takes action – because she herself doesn’t. One might think that this whole experiment of her is her taking action, but it isn’t. It’s her putting herself in a position for others to take action, and for her to gauge the results.

“Meanwhile, it turned out that, for around six months, Scott had been exclusively sleeping with one woman, a lot younger than me. That bothered me”

“I’m grateful I experienced my marriage to Scott (who has since found a new partner)”

Well, all’s well that ends well.

Scott is relieved the burden of being with this grass is greener shrew and is most likely in a new relationship with a much younger woman from all signs pointing to.

She is now post wall without children and she is “at peace with that, too.”

Only thing i would enjoy more is getting in a time machine and seeing these 2 ten years from now to see where they exist on the happiness spectrum hehehe

For as questionable and retarded as these women’s actions are when they do this (EPL/Wild Oats)… one has to admit, for all the initial pain or problems it might cause the men in their lives – it does ultimately save them from living horrible lives committed to these rtards. The guy usually bounces from it to live a more fulfilling life, the women burn out fast and fade away writing books and making due with their empty lives.

It was for my case. Tho not physically cheated on, my ex EPL detonated our marriage for the sake of chasing a career, status and fame. She preferred the love of strangers on twitter over anything i could offer. Had she not put me on the lowest rung, i never would have grown the balls to end the sham marriage she wanted us to continue ‘pretending’ to be in for appearances sake, never got the balls to hire a lawyer, set the tone, split the finances and end everything in a reasoned manner that did not cripple me. I ended off well despite as Dalrock would say “Bargaining in the shadow of the law”.

Ever since, i found the sphere, fixed my mental state, took ownership of my life, fixed my body/physique. Mind body n soul. Truly content navigating life with ease, understanding the how and the why, always knowing the answer when others look dumbfounded. With blinders off, the world isn’t scary. Interactions aren’t mystical or magic.. they’re rational and expected.

To all this, i owe my ex a big thank you for making my life too unbearable to actually stick it out with her. She freed me chasing her own hypergamy off the proverbial cliff. I don’t know what she’s gone on to accomplish since we parted, nor do i care. I haven’t followed any aspect of her since because her life became irrelevant to me.

I know the gist of this post and all posts in regards to EPL/hypergamy/relationship detonations are meant to convey a certain message – i can only say there is a certain liberation for men who blindly followed their blue pill fi programming but are strong enough to persevere – there’s an excellent chance your life will get better for you in a way it won’t for the one who pushes the big red button.

I’d love to purchase a copy that i could listen on my commute everyday. Stuff sinks in deeper when it sounds like someone is talking to me and makes me feel like im having a discussion with a real person.

“Ballista asks, on his site, “why is divornography (divorce pornography) marketed exclusively to women? Why are there articles in women’s magazines and romance novels for women like Eat Pray Love that glamorize divorce, but nothing of the sort exists or is marketed to men? Why is there no male divorce porn, no stories of men divorcing their obese, aging harpy wives, liberating themselves from their marriage vows, and ending up living happily ever after banging large-breasted 21 year-old lingerie models?”

Well, in 2004, then-prime minister of Gyurcsány Ferenc of Hungary belived that Hungary is in a phase of rapid developement (it was not), and ordinary people will soon experience a boost in their living standard. To illustrate his point, he made the following remark:

“Who has a two-room-apartment, would in general deserve three; who has three, four; who has four, a house. Who has an eld…, olderly, elderly?… olderly [struggling with an unintended portmanteau] wife, a younger one; who has a badly behaved kid, a well-behaved. Of course, he would deserve.” /source of the English translation: Wikipedia/

In early 90s I knew some women in late 40s and early 50s I guess they were the early “wild oats” I was in my mid 20s and kept being hearing the phrase :

I want to find out who I was

I use to tell them no, just say ; I want to fuck as many guys as I can.
Most of them had left their husbands (kids have gone to universities) and these women were out for a lot of ONS.(I was one of their casualties).

I believe women in 40s 50s looks at their bodies that once use to be the jewel of the crown and see how it once use to be so beautiful and wanted by men.
They know now the end is near and they are facing the final curtain.

I have two ideas for movie scripts, and I can’t decide which one is better:

1. Stephen is a divorced and highly successful, forty-eight year old San Francisco stock broker raising his teenage son (in the absence of a deadbeat, selfish ex-wife), who is persuaded by his colorful New York buddy, Devlin, to take a well deserved, first-class vacation to St. Bart’s. As he soaks in the beauty of the island, he encounters three different lithe, drop-dead gorgeous, and spirited young islanders, Vivienne, Isele, and Gigi, who are all 25 years younger than him. Their lusty and charmingly competitive pursuits for him turn into a hot and steamy three-way affair that force Stephan to take personal inventory of his life and try to find a balance between his desire for unfettered carnal fulfillment with multiple young women, and the responsibilities of fatherhood and his corporate executive life.

2. At 48 years old, Edward Gilliam is educated, has a home, a wife, and a successful career as a writer. He is, however, unhappy in his marriage and initiates a divorce. He then embarks on several steamy affairs with women in his hometown social sphere that do not work out, leaving him pensive and empty. After finalizing the difficult divorce, He vows to spend the next year traveling the world.

First, he spends four months in Brazil, sampling the exotic cuisine and enjoying the life of a king, then he spends three months in Nepal, finding his spiritual and physical balance by training in exotic martial arts at a remote Buddhist temple. He ends the year in Thailand, looking for “balance” of the two and begins “collecting” bedpost notches among the young local women and the sexually liberated 20-something European tourists, while simultaneously pursuing a lusty affair with a breathtaking 23 year old Taiwanese bikini model.

Personally, I think either of these films would be award-winning box office hits and roundly applauded as empowering tales of positive masculinity by the MSM and pop-culture style makers. They would inspire men to throw off their yokes of oppression and pursue a fulfilled life with gusto.

After all, these are merely script-flips (from a masculine perspective) of “How Stella Got Her Groove Back” and “Eat, Pray, Love,” respectively.

The time for this brawd to have kids was over 10 years ago, which would have been in her 20’s and early 30’s at a stretch. By her mid 30’s (possibly earlier) and definitely in her 40’s she dried up and puts a high risk on any child she does have in terms of various genetic/birth defects. Not having kids is just a rationalisation to go fuck around and get the last of any alpha fux she can get.

She’s a post waller about to get sent to the scrap heap making a last ditch effort to get some self validation/alpha fux. I wish I could slap some sense into the husband, time to pack his bags, possibly lose something in the divorce, but still a chance to have a decent life. At the least get some dread game going if your operating in an open marriage.

Think about it this way. If he divorced the sloot at the start of the year it’s one half his assets AND probable alimony.

BUT NOW he has documented infidelity. He has the proof that wifey has an independent chance at substantial income due documenting to her slootiness.
All and all the Husband now has a far greater amount of leverage in negotiating a division of assets. So… in a way the sloot “having it all” yields the husband getting more assets post sloot year. And no alimony due to her new job as a slooty novelist.

It’s really classic the hamster drove her to Openly Documenting Hypergamy. Now all the Husband’s attorney has to do is propose a trial by jury… voila massive concessions during settlement!

This is actually a GREAT case study in how most men should handle these things. LET THE SLOOT ROAM… and document her adventures if she decides not to write about them herself.

Heck I remember a girl I knew years ago. She was 30something and convinced her husbank did not care for her. So… she cheated and told him… he said “ok”. And the dumb sloot just did the dude even harder. Husbank calmly called lawyer who called a PI and proceeded to document her open slootyness with new dude. The husbank was very wealthy and apparently was very well advised by his lawyer.

The Sloot Wife was actually surprised when about 6 months of documented indiscretions were presented. Granted if like most fools you go before a judge (judges don’t care) but if you propose a jury trial to decide settlement… whoa now. The Sloots attorney starts advising his client on the chances. Then Ka Ching! big givebacks are coming your way.
If I remember correctly she got some cash (less than 100k) and an alimony of about 20k or so. The Husbank was worth about 10 mill.

This movie sounds toxic. Women are going to believe that they can cheat on their husband and he’ll take her back anyway. My ex had her backup husband around. I never even knew the guy existed until the day I left her. He wanted sex to stick around so he got it.

It’s definitely hard to compete with a fantasy. I read through several years of messages between them. Much of it is difficult or impossible to remember as it shocked my blue pill self to an extreme and psychologically damaging degree. I do know that she only saw what he shared and she filled the rest on the blanks in. With me she was around me after work when I was tired and saw the worse parts of my day every day.

I used to be very confused about how she did not realize that our marriage was over, and really never existed, and that once I found out I was gone. She really didn’t seem to understand that would happen. It doesn’t help that her friends beta husbands had been cuckolded (in one case three times) and still remained married to their sluts.

Fast forward almost two years after I filed for divorce and she’s still riding the CC. Her backup husband doesn’t want anything more from her then plate status. She continues to try to solve her father issues with more cock. My kids and my wallet are paying the price.

See, men, our status as mate selectors is officially obsolete. The power of a man to decide which woman to consort with was one rooted in social and material benefit for the woman.That power was also universal-every man had the ability to select a woman of some sort to the end of beginning a family.

Now that society and the instruments thereof work for women -and by extension their core hypergamous programming honed quietly through millenia of natural selection, including through the modern era- the females now have the power of mate selection from start to finish .We men are now the targets to be pursued on a social level-and thus our agency for mate selection has been cancelled. Worse for our peace of mind, any avenue of social interaction between men and women is a potential mate selection area for women thanks to hypergamy’s always on state ; thus the extensive sexual harassment legislation even in offices and places not traditionally considered “mate shopping areas” under the old Patriarchial paradigm.

Any man who’s been sicced on by the social system for displeasing a woman socially already understands this concept viscerally.

Where the “Eat,Pray,Love” culture comes in is easy.Its merely the transfer of sexual agency to women formerly unaccustomed to the same.Society used to say that divorce itself was a last resort event, and a woman jettisoning her husband for frivolity was considered equally reprobate as the classic trope of the husband catapulting his aging wife for a younger ,hotter replacement.
With the Modern Matriarchy now in the drivers seat, its next overall objective is to repudiate that custom to ensure all women-fat, ugly, fit,pretty, young, old, and all in bewteen have the equal hypergamous right to whatever male suits their needs, at ANY time.

Clearly this conflicts with the olde patriarchial custom of “Till Death Do Us Part”. So that custom’s given the heave to for “Find yourself in the arms of other men, and its totally OK.”Note-younger women already well and truly live this motto to the max. If youre a male in this Modern Matriarchy , youre an appliance or -for Alphas-a sexual game console to be traded in at the slightest whim.

The older generation of women -ones raised with some degree of knowledge of the Olde Ways- are taking to it fabulously, hence the “divorceporn” culture. Its foil would be a male-centric society which openly condones trading an older wife for a younger girl .Naturally, few men married to a celibate hag would disagree with this idea .

Yeah the only way I can “father” my children is through incessant court action to get the government to parent them. My parenting is to pay the government to make decisions about my children. And I get to pay them to parent my children further in school.

I wonder when the state will get state run daycares that I get to pay for?

Oh and if I say the wrong thing around my kids and they repeat it I have been called to court and chastised for my thought crimes. Again, I had to pay for the courts to parent me and my thought crimes, using the rationale that my thoughts will be passed on to my children.

Well duh they will. I’m their “father”, right? I want my thoughts to be passed on to them.

My youngest wanted to be a Gangster.I tried so much to pull him back from that life style.He is basically a sociopath.No remorse and I was in court everytime to let him know that I was with him and I apologized to all his victims.He spent most of his teen years locked up.Just before he was 18 the judge decided to put him in boot camp rather than allow him to go to adult jail.I was hit with a levy for $26,000.00 to pay for his final Ghetto lockup.7 months spent with Detroit hood thugs.He’s a woman beater and now a prison veteran.3 years in Federal prison for Gun violations and drug selling.Divorce fucked up all 3 of my kids but he by far had the hardest time.It has left me with a shallow opinion of life.

@Rollo: “Better yet, the black men in my last post are shamed and painted as sex tourist rapists – Rinaldi, a triumph of the feminine spirit for the same sentiment.”

Exactly. This is why as medium as message & demonstrate don’t explicate go hand in hand. Men really can’t waste any time giving a damn what women think or going even further to accommodate psychotic compromises that they expect, and universe forbid, modify our behaviour.

Do not let the hamster take up residence in your head.

Do what you want to do; own a classic car, ride bikes, fuck young chics, travel to fuck hot chics, woodwork, modifying shit, whatever engages your masculinity…What they think? we just cannot be mistaken for people who give fuck.

I’ve noticed when you stick by what you say, they hate you, then they want to be under you. So in future, Brazil, Vietnam, Phillipines, Hong Kong, japan, Scandanavia, Cuba, Australia, yeah, looking forward to getting that visa stamped fam!

@ChocDoc
There’s already something like a “bachelor tax”. In some countries a single unmarried individual pay more taxes than married ones. Subsidies for women and children must come from somewhere.
End Game has begun, gentlemen.

___

The End Game ends when single men decide to produce only enough for themselves to live on, rather than overproduce. I believe Dalrock has posted some charts on men’s participation in the workforce has gone down significantly over the past 50 years for various reasons, ( I don’t know if I can post a ‘competitor’s’ link here), but End Game scenarios to squeeze more out of men will only drive even more men out of that pool of productive labor.

I suppose the reason I asked is that I was curious if you’d do a mainstream interview if they asked. It seems like they’d spend the whole thing just trying to paint you as the bad guy, even if you don’t come across that way. Editing, taking answers out of context, keeping on their agenda to try and ignore yours, stuff like that.

Just kinda curious of your take on it or how you planned to handle it if it happens.

I’m ready to do it, but I have my doubts I’ll get the call. I’m not the kind of crazy they want to paint the manosphere as. They like the Paul Elam because he looks like Charles Manson and isn’t good in the moment. Roosh has a characteristic look and he can go off on rants, but even he doesn’t trip the crazy enough for them.

If I went live, it would be more damaging to the narrative, because I’m measured and prepared. I’m not the frothing hate-crazy they need for the story they prepare ahead of time.

I’ve worked in branding, marketing and PR long enough to know how this shit works.

I’m sorry to hear about your situation because it’s crappy that your kid is being used against you as leverage, and it sounds like she’s young enough that you’ll have to deal with her mother for a long time, whereas if your daughter was in high school you could just tell her, “I love you baby, I’ll see you in 2 years when you turn 18 and you can do what you want.” and cut off ties with her mother.

In this guy’s story though, he’d had a vasectomy and he had no kids before that vasectomy, with this woman. So in his case, he can take one blow and move on, to his younger girlfriend. To take his wife back in his loving arms, after a year of her being passed around like a sock puppet, likely with some STD, is insane.

“It’s not about the joys of having a family; it’s about checking a box off the bucket list of Life Achievements”

Had an ex like this. There were a few glaring issues she and I had but this was a huge one to me. She wanted children, but she wanted to be clear that they were basically gonna go from womb to live in nanny because she was going to be too busy with her career. Keep in mind I was Blue Pill at the time, but gaining self-esteem and losing tolerance for female bullshit.

I told her “You don’t like children. You like the concept of children. That’s a recipe for an awful parent.” That connected the turbocharger, supercharger, and nitrous to the hamster and off it went. Never once did she hear my point: she was planning ahead of time to fuck up her children for her own selfishness. I wasn’t about to be party to that.

Since then I’ve noticed a lot of people (both men and women) that just roll through life checking boxes. It’s just most insidious and damaging when applied to the process of child-rearing in my estimate.

“… So that custom’s given the heave to for “Find yourself in the arms of other men, and its totally OK.”Note-younger women already well and truly live this motto to the max. If youre a male in this Modern Matriarchy , youre an appliance or -for Alphas-a sexual game console to be traded in at the slightest whim.”

I think many commenters including these bloggers here are projecting their wildest and craziest, fantastical teenage male notions of sex crazed women screwing every “alpha” guy they meet.

Most women I see in my day-to-day life are not attractive or not that much and I wouldn’t touch them with a 10-foot barge poll (I live in a major metro area on the east coast, and not fly-over country). They aren’t that appealing and worth the time. Living in a college town with an above average population of young women, say 18 – 25, is not representative of America – outside of these college towns, you’re not going to see these concentrated hordes of younger, more attractive women milling about where I think these red pill “theorists” live and derive their theories on female behavior.

The idea that these hordes of mostly plain, sub-par or tubby girls are offering themselves up for sex to the local hottie alpha guy and he accepts her offer is laughable, delusional and is not realistic. And the thought of these 40+ post-wall, newly divorced women with maybe 2 kids doing this shit? Come on, be real (maybe there is an upper level of beta guy that these women are targeting then?). Be careful of projecting what you think in your mind is reality (or based on a limited experience) onto the real world, it most likely is not accurate or not even remotely close to being true. I’m not a playboy (or alpha looking) and I’ve rejected the advances of plenty of women, many attractive, but for different reasons. Other guys, including alpha guys, that I know say the same thing. I really don’t think I lead such a sheltered life, and I get around enough with women. Don’t assume that certain behavior of a specific group of people can be demonstrative of a broader population (like apex fallacy of composition). Sure there are promiscuous women and men, these of course are outliers. Of course, the more attractive men and women can be promiscuous because they can if their so inclined, but to extrapolate this behavior to the whole population is most probably not realistic.

You discuss “vulnerability” in your posts and in your books. You seem to equate vulnerability with openness and honesty.

Openness and honesty is not vulnerability.

Openness and honesty are not detrimental to intimate relationships. In fact they are required for intimacy. Without them, there is no intimacy, but they do not guarantee intimacy.

Disclosure of facts does not universally constitute submission or even imply subjugation unless we are universally attempting to hide the truth.

Vulnerability is not defined simply by the disclosure of facts. Vulnerability is defined by Webster as “open to physical or emotional harm easily persuadable or liable to give in to temptation”. I respect Webster’s definition and for the purpose of understanding what I am getting at here, you should also.

Vulnerability exclusively relates to a potential for harm to occur. Without potential for harm, there is no vulnerability.

What harm can there be in telling someone you “love” them who you are intimate with or hope to be intimate with?

The question worth examining in this context is; exactly what is the damage and from where does the “harm” originate?

The only honest answers to these questions are:

The damage? – you experienced a reaction that is not what you expected and hoped for as an ego investment or to satisfy yearning for sexual gratification.

The harm originated from? – You. You are literally using someone else’s behavior, reaction, etc . as a weapon against yourself. You can of course choose to blame that someone else, but your blame does not change the fact that you set it all up in your mind through your expectations. The other person is just another free individual “pebble on the beach” like you: free to think, feel and react independently like all of us.

The idea that these hordes of mostly plain, sub-par or tubby girls are offering themselves up for sex to the local hottie alpha guy and he accepts her offer is laughable, delusional and is not realistic.

Yet 50 Shades of Grey took in $94.7M on its debut weekend, out sold all records for pre-sale tickets on Fandango 2 weeks in advance and the book series remains in the top best sellers for the decade.

@GeorgeMeeks, I realize it’s difficult for you to confront truths like this, but you’ve taken the Red Pill now, there’s no plugging back in (no matter what Mark Manson would like to sell you):

True vulnerability is not a value-added selling point for a man when it comes to approaching and attracting women. As with all things, your vulnerability is best discovered by a woman through demonstration –never explaining those vulnerabilities to her with the intent of appearing more human as the feminine would define it.

Women want a bulwark against their own emotionalism, not a co-equal male emoter whose emotionalism would compete with her own. The belief that male vulnerability is a strength is a slippery slope from misguided attraction to emotional codependency, to overt dependency on a woman to accommodate and compensate for the weaknesses that vulnerability really implies

Good points. Your measured style and non-vindictive matter-of-fact tone have basically been why I’ve respected your opinion. You wouldn’t get advertising dollars for them at all, and that’s a great thing.

Elam just comes across as butthurt and angry, no matter how valid his points. Not to mention yeah, looking Manson doesn’t help. Do a Google of his name and you can find articles on the first page painting him as advocating for “deadbeat dads”, or his own responses to media attacks where he pretty much spews Internet Tough Guy bluster. Not productive.

It’s unfortunate you’ll probably not get a chance to represent the ‘sphere. I’ve learned a lot about being a Man here, and it’s starting to change how almost all people react to me for the better. Honestly that’s what I think TRP is about: creating driven, successful, happy, widely-loved Men filled with positive traits. Casting it as woman-hating or whiny simps begging for society to go easy on them is just wrong.

Your point makes a lot of sense though. While the public hasn’t gotten any smarter, in the Internet age it’s like news articles and segments have been hooked up to a gigantic bullshit detector array. Laziness will be sniffed out and exposed.

” Be careful of projecting what you think in your mind is reality (or based on a limited experience) onto the real world, it most likely is not accurate or not even remotely close to being true.”

And then you go on to do exactly that which you warned against, and suggested that your experience is what actually happens in real life:

” I’m not a playboy (or alpha looking) and I’ve rejected the advances of plenty of women, many attractive, but for different reasons. Other guys, including alpha guys, that I know say the same thing. I really don’t think I lead such a sheltered life, and I get around enough with women.”
___________________

I’ve seen exactly what’s described here. I’ve seen plenty of high value, good looking men “slum it” with girls 2 or 3 SMV points below them. It’s really all about where the attraction floor for that particular guy is. As long as that girl is at or above the “floor”, and she’s willing, it’s game on.

You have not responded to my comments previous to the last and now you reference my email address rather than my blog name. I suspect you are personally unhappy with what I wrote. Is this why you are responding personally?

Restlessness is a condition of living. We humans have only one alternative to remove frustration from our life pursuits while we remain in this world: death. Males cannot stop being pussy beggars while humanity continues, any more than all life can stop eating life. In this context it seems ego investments allow no alternative except death.There is not and cannot be rest in the world inhabited by “manospherics” and “hypergamics” which are only current pop culture terms for what has existed since the human race existed.

You effectively cut through tautology and circular logic at the beginning and end of the day even though you employ scads of tautology and circular logic from beginning to end. What is more you encourage us (your pawns) to employ the same nonsense as though the manosphere could out-strategize and find rest from hypergamy in this world….while telling us that such a thing simply cannot be done by either the utterly stupid or the highly rational!

Other than egoistic sadistic glee derived from your exploitation of fools (including myself) who sign up and post responses on your blog, what on earth could be your purpose? Certainly not the promotion of rationality. Certainly not relief for tortured pussy beggars. The only logical benefit to you is financial gain.

Yes, it is. It gives people an in to your weaknesses, particular if expressed directly and verbally as such. The reason deception and lying are used so much in nature is that it confers an advantage. Humans lie, deceive, withhold the truth, or are selectively honest because full open honesty is rarely in their own best interests.

Living in denial of that is setting your self up to be broadsided by the truth that complete openness and honesty is the fast track to getting steamrolled. Source: personal experience, over and over again.

This site and the blog are nothing more that what the world has been fooled with before many times

No, your Blue Pill horseshit about open, honest communication in relationships is what those sources have sold over and over again. It just doesn’t work that way.

Don’t try to peddle old advice I’ve heard repeatedly (and more importantly had fail repeatedly) in my life as some kind of panacea. It’s not. It’s part of what was wrong with my previous relationships.

Look, the thing you have to understand about women is they are NEVER happy. Doesn’t matter what she has, or has experienced – she will ALWAYS come up with something she doesn’t have and wants. It is that simple. So don’t waste your time – your job is to enjoy your life. Men are simple creatures, we can be happy doing almost anything – fucking young women, or driving, or sky-diving – doesn’t matter we can take pleasure in it. Women aren’t like that – they WANT…. Even if they don’t know what it is that they want, they know there must be something. THAT is the real curse of women. She wants whatever she doesn’t have, and will throw away everything she does have to try to get it. Then she will realize all she threw away – which she no longer has – and will try to get it back. Yes, it makes no sense to a man – but that is a woman’s nature.

And guess what? It isn’t your problem – unless you make your problem! Just fuck them when you need to fuck, and do what you want. Be happy – because as a man, you can be. That is the gift of a man – we can be happy with what we have, doesn’t matter what it is, we can enjoy it. So be a man – enjoy women when you want, on your terms, but really don’t saddle yourself with someone that will NEVER be happy. Don’t make her problems yours…. It is as simple as that…

This opens up the little phenomenon of cougars and the young males predilection for older birds, barren game.

Easy lays, no oops pregnancies, both parties know what it is, no emotions, no attachment, no money transfer, low cost and both get what they want, sexual release for the younger men and attention for the older birds.

Given that 1/5 of women are barren (1/4 for bachelor degreed women) I wouldn’t be surprised if this is more prevalent than people admit.

I’ve seen quite a few omega friends go down this route, barred from the younger women this is the only option available to them. Interestingly the older women keep it on the down low and hide it from their families even if divorced.

We all know openness and honesty shouldn’t be used without discernment.

It is time you swallowed the Red Pill about Rollo or continue whipping yourself with your own dick as he encourages. Remember once you’ve swallowed the red pill,….there is no going back.

And the game being played here?…. “Let’s you and them fight”….and you can pay me while I watch you fight….

Consider Rollo’s following two assertion’s.

1. “The Cardinal Rule of Sexual Strategies:
For one gender’s sexual strategy to succeed the other gender must compromise or abandon their own.”

2. “….In the beginning of this section I stated that men and women’s approach to love was ultimately complementary to one another and in this last model we can see how the two approaches – idealistic and opportunistic – dovetail together. That may seem a bit strange at this point, but when social influences imbalance this conventional complement we see how well the two should come together…..”

Obviously these two assertions are diametrically opposed. Complementary strategies do not require the compromise or abandonment of one or the other for mutual combined success. In other words, for the two strategies to be “ultimately complementary” and “dovetail together”, then both must be maintained. Neither can be abandoned or compromised if they are to be “ultimately complementary” and “dovetail together”. THIS IS THE MOST EXTREME BETA SHIT and combined with what he previously wrote it trumps all others before him….Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus….His Needs Her Needs….on and on. It is the same shit but worse. I hope you can see this.

Notice the “Cardinal Rule” states nothing about what “frame” one or the other strategy must be operated within.
Should the “Cardinal Rule of Sexual Strategies” be changed?
Or does there exist a more universal rule: The only integrity is an integrated lack of integrity. All things human are an ambiguous paradox.

I posted the following:

“”Preventative Medicine – “….when a man’s idealistic approach to love is in the dominate frame it acts as a buffer to woman’s loving opportunism that would otherwise imbalance and threaten the endurance of that family and relationship.”

In all your previous writings you elaborate extensively on how man’s idealistic approach to love is his downfall and how it facilitates feral hypergamy. Yet now you are saying that same idealism exercised within an idealistic dominant frame is the preserver of the family and the relationship. Man’s idealistic love is the universes great white knight galactic rescue savior of all pussy and family? He just needs to operate in an idealistic state of male dominance to prevail? Yet everything you’ve written before states that the embracement of that ideal ensures subordination not dominance.

So now it seems that you believe mans idealistic love in a “dominate” “frame” is the way it “should” be. This must be the most “alpha” of all masculine sexual ideals……fantasies…or perhaps the extreme of all betaism.””

Rollo’s response –

“Men’s idealistic concept of love is a buffer against women’s opportunistic concept of love. When that idealism is expressed from a Beta mindset women’s opportunism dominates him and it’s debilitating. When it’s expressed from an Alpha mindset it supersedes her opportunism to the relationship’s benefit.”

OOOHHH Oooh Kaaay…..NOW I get it. You just have to act like a “beta” using and “alpha” frame……Yea man! So THAT’S it man. Yea, beta in an alpha frame. Cool man! Now I know how to REALLY be a man. That’s soooo cool, you just have to be beta in and alpha shell….Can you dig it dude?

Maybe “Rollo” figured all this out because he has fucked 40 women….one black, ? Asian, ? Mexican (does anyone really care…and if so WHY?) or maybe its because he “really knows women” and he is “seeensitive”…..

Rollo can, has been, and will be wrong. Every human can. I accept that. However in your case what I’m seeing is somebody who is becoming emotional and angry trying to tell me they’re making the more rational argument.

No, you’re making a butthurt, angry argument. You’re throwing around invective like it’s going out of style. You’re even making forced laughing part of your writing; always a sure sign of a try-hard pissed off that nobody’s buying their argument. It’s no longer about what’s wrong or right to you. It’s about fuck anyone that disagrees with you.

Men’s idealistic concept of love is a buffer against women’s opportunistic concept of love. When that idealism is expressed from a Beta mindset women’s opportunism dominates him and it’s debilitating. When it’s expressed from an Alpha mindset it supersedes her opportunism to the relationship’s benefit.

If you want to use Blue Valentine as an example, the guy in the relationship abdicates all authority and ambition over to his wife’s opportunism. He idealistically believes “love is all that matters” and has no greater ambition than to please her and ‘just be himself’, because that should be enough.
Consequently she despises him for it. She’s the de facto authority in the relationship and he slips into the subdominant (another child to care for) role.

Now if a man’s Alpha, willful, idealism propels him to greater ambition, and to prioritize his concept of love as the dominant, and places himself as his mental point of origin for which a woman accepts you can see how this leads to the conventional model.

And your remarks…

Sorry for the smart ass remark. I just cannot swallow the use of ANY idealism in loving a woman. I’ve sometimes been accused as being a “total asshole” for not following “conventional norms” or acquiescing to peoples bullshit. My brother labeled me a “Nazi” after I gave him the advice to get in the gym, work hard, focus on self improvement during his divorce from his first wife. He was literally balling and saying, “I just wanted to love a girl”. I thought he outgrew it in his second marriage until a few years ago he announced to everyone during a holiday celebration that he believed every woman “should have the right to say no “”at any time””…” He brought the subject up for the purpose of displaying his feigned consideration of “all women” in order to aggrandize himself. My sister and wife were both disgusted by his comment. I asked my sister, “So, you didn’t expect your daughters to bend over, pull off their clothes and beg him to fuck them because he is such a hero?” I thought my question would solicit total disgust. to my surprise it did not. They both burst out laughing. My sister said, “exactly”. My brother hasn’t spoken to me in 3 years.
Enough about my brother though. I guess I can swallow the application of “true” love or idealistic love in an “alpha” dominated context. I could not love my wife unless she allowed me to dominate her and the relationship. And she is not so bad off, also I allow her a lot of personal freedom. She receives the benefit of my “love” because she is subordinate. I guess it is partially her subordination combined with her need for security that makes me love her.

Maybe the confusion occurs when we men do not realize the difference between really loving and caring for a woman vs pretending to love and care for a woman to try and negotiate for sex. Before you can love another, you must first love yourself.

And me again…

@NBTM, the problems start when you expect your idealistic concept of love to be reciprocated by a woman. Women do not share the same concept of love that men are conditioned to believe everyone mutually accepts.

That belief is where a Beta mindset and an idealistic concept of love (one in which men believe they can be loved in spite of their performance) becomes a dangerous liability to him.

Men will still hold that idealistic concept whether they’re Alpha or Beta; the difference is the Alpha will control the Frame of that relationship and accept that a woman will never share his concept of love. In fact, this acknowledgement can be an excellent foundation of Amused Mastery.

Now did you have something more to add to the topic conversation, or have you got your attention quota for the day?